GENEALOGY-DNA-L Archives

Archiver > GENEALOGY-DNA > 2010-02 > 1266729084


From: "Diana Gale Matthiesen" <>
Subject: Re: [DNA] (no subject) - when is a MOORE not a MOORE?
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2010 00:11:24 -0500
References: <50909.1266702728@connpoint.net><6AA2184FE7774606A2F99D85F0BEE93F@HP><9EBC0BC2D15947108668C8BA6A382789@belinda>
In-Reply-To: <9EBC0BC2D15947108668C8BA6A382789@belinda>


P.S. I just noticed you said you did it for 37 markers. Well, yes, they do
look more closely related at 37 markers, but they diverge noticeably at 67,
which is the reason I've set 67 markers as the standard in all my projects and
the reason I press R1b's so hard to make the upgrade.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: On Behalf Of Belinda Dettmann
> Sent: Saturday, February 20, 2010 10:05 PM
> To:
> Subject: Re: [DNA] (no subject) - when is a MOORE not a MOORE?
>
> Hi Cornelia
>
> I've constructed a Fluxus Network diagram of relationships for Moores
> in Group 2 (for 37 markers) and I believe your husband is a bona fide
> Moore who belongs to this Group. I think the founding haplotype for
> this group is either 71529 or 123490 and your husband is 3 mutations
> away from 123490 and 4 away from 71529.
>
> Group 2 is quite a compact group - I'd love to know how FTDNA
> does the
> grouping - and I'm pretty sure he's in it. I've also had a look at a
> diagram for all R1b Moores with 37 markers. It's large and
> messy, but
> Group 2 comes up as a distinct group and well separated from other
> Moores.
>
> I'll send you a message offline so you can see the details of what
> I've done.
>
> Belinda
>


This thread: